Imprint

Published by

Institute of Strategy and Policy on Natural Resources and Environment (ISPONRE)

479 Hoang Quoc Viet Street, Hanoi, Vietnam

E info@isponre.gov.vn

I http://isponre.gov.vn

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit (GIZ) GmbH

GIZ in Vietnam

Strategic Mainstreaming of Ecosystem-based Adaptation in Viet Nam (EbA)

49, Hai Ba Trung, Hanoi, Vietnam

E office.eba@giz.de

I www.giz.de/viet-nam

International Centre for Environmental Management (ICEM)

| Hanoi | Sydney | Kathmandu | Hong Kong | Vientiane | Phnom Penh

E info@icem.com.au

I icem.com.au

Responsible Editors

Nguyen The Chinh; Carew-Reid, Jeremy; and Wahl, Michael

Lead Authors

Mackenzie, Catherine and Mather, Robert (ICEM)

With contribution of

Benedikter, Simon; Dao Trong Hung; Ho Dac Thai Hoang; Litzenberg, Ivo; Mai Ky

Vinh; Mai Van Trinh; Ngo Dang Tri; Ngo Nu Quynh Trang; Nguyen Hoang Duc; Ngu-

yen Huu Hao; Nguyen Thi Ngoc Anh; Nguyen Si Ha; Pham Quynh Huong; Schaefer,

Christine; Tran Thi Kim Lien; Tran Thi Thu Ha; and Wahl, Michael

Layout

Le Thi Thanh Thuy

Photo Credit

Copyright © 2016, GIZ

On behalf of

The Vietnamese Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment (MONRE)

The German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Building and

Nuclear Safety (BMUB)

GIZ and ISPONRE are responsible for the content of this publication

Vietnam, December 2016

iii

Abbreviations

ADB Asian Development Bank

ARCC Ares Capital Corporation

CVCA Climate Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment

CCA Climate Change Adaptation

CSIRO Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation

CBD Convention on Biological Diversity

CAM Climate Change Adaption and Mitigation Methodology

CREATE Climate Resilience Evaluation for Adaptation through Empower-

ment

CRiSTAL Community-based Risk Screening tool-Adaptation and Livelihoods

EURAC European Academy of Bozen/Bolzano

EbA Ecosystem-based Adaptation

GIZ Gesellschaft für Internationale Zusammenarbeit

ISPONRE Institute of Strategy and Policy on Natural Resources and Environ-

ment

IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change

IUCN International Union for Conservation of Nature

IISD International Institute for Sustainable Development

ICEM International Centre for Environmental Management

KEA Key Economic Asset

LMB Lower Mekong Basin

MRC Mekong River Commission

SEZ Special Economic Zone

PES Payment for Environmental Service

PLI Promoting Local Innovation

PRA Participatory rural appraisal

PROVIA Programme of Research on Climate Change Vulnerability, Impacts

& Adaptation

SES Socio-Ecological System

TOR Term of Reference

TESSA Tools for Eco-system Services site-based Assessment

UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change

USAID United States Agency for International Development

UKCIP United Kingdom Climate Impacts Programme

VA Vulnerability Assessment

VASES Vulnerability Assessment for Socio-Ecological System

WWF World Wild Fund for Nature

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................... III

TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................. IV

GLOSSARY OF TERMS USED IN THE ASSESSMENT .................................................... IV

I. Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 8

1. Ecosystem-based Adaptation ..................................................................................... 8

2.“Mainstreaming EbA in Vietnam” ................................................................................. 8

3.The need for a new approach ..................................................................................... 9

II. Vulnerability Assessment for Ecosystem-based Adaptation: Concepts and

Definitions ................................................................................................................................ 10

III. Implementation of the proposed VASES Approach .................................................... 13

1.Scoping the Provincial context for climate change ................................................ 13

2.Identification of Socio-Ecological Systems and Key Economic Assets.................. 14

3.Vulnerability Assessment of Socio-Ecological Systems and Key Economic

Assets……………………………………………………………………………………………..15

4.Identifying EbA and other Adaptation Options ....................................................... 16

IV. Additional considerations ................................................................................................ 20

V. Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 20

Annex ....................................................................................................................................... 21

REFERENCES .......................................................................................................... 28

List of tables

Table 1: Definition of Approach, Methods and Tools........................................................ 10

Table 2: criteria used to rank adaptation interventions (adapted from IUCN, Marshall

et al. 2009) ............................................................................................................................... 19

List of figures

Figure 1: The components of vulnerability (from Marshall et al. 2009; Preston and

Stafford-Smith, 2009) .............................................................................................................. 11

Figure2: Linking ecological vulnerability and socio-economic vulnerability (from

Marshall et. al., 2009) ............................................................................................................. 12

Figure 3: Potential impact matrix: the relationship between exposure and sensitivity in

determining the degree of potential impact (Hills & Bennett, 2010) .............................. 15

Figure 4: Vulnerability matrix: the relationship between potential impact and

adaptive capacity in determining the degree of ecological vulnerability (Hills &

Bennett 2010) .......................................................................................................................... 16

Figure 5: Conceptual Framework for EbA interventions ................................................... 17

v

Glossary of terms used in the assessment

Adaptive capacity is the ability of a system to adjust to climate change (including

climate variability and extremes) to moderate potential damages, to take ad-

vantage of opportunities, or to cope with the consequences (GIZ 2013: 2). Adaptive

capacity is also understood in terms of the ability to prepare for a future threat and in

the process increase resilience and the ability to recover from the impact (ICEM).

Climate Change: Changes in climate over a prolonged time. The IPCC (2011) de-

fines climate change as a change caused by natural internal processes or external

forcings, or by persistent anthropogenic changes in the composition of the atmos-

phere or land use. This definition differs slightly from the UNFCCC definition which only

focuses on anthropogenic change referring to climate change as a change of cli-

mate that is directly or indirectly caused by anthropogenic forces altering the com-

position of the atmosphere; and which is in addition to natural climate change. Cli-

mate change includes the observed and projected increases or decreases in re-

gional and local temperatures, changes in timing and amount of rainfall, sea level

rise etc. (ISPONRE, DONRE, WWF, 2013b).

An ecosystem is a dynamic complex of plant, animal, and microorganism communi-

ties and the nonliving environment interacting as a functional unit. Humans are an in-

tegral part of ecosystems (MEA 1 2003, 3).

Ecosystem-based adaption (EbA) is the use of biodiversity and ecosystem services

as part of an overall adaption strategy to help people to adapt to the adverse ef-

fects of climate change (Convention on Biological Diversity 2009).

Ecosystem services are the benefits people obtain from ecosystems. These include

provisioning services such as food and water; regulating services such as regulation

of floods, drought, land degradation, and disease; supporting services such as soil

formation and nutrient cycling; and cultural services such as recreational, spiritual, re-

ligious and other nonmaterial benefits. (MEA 2003, 3)

Exposure is the degree of climate stress on a particular system or species; it is influ-

enced by long-term changes in climate conditions, and by changes in climate vari-

ability, including the magnitude and frequency of extreme events (ICEM).

Sensitivity is the degree to which a species or system will be affected by, or respon-

sive to climate change exposure (ICEM).

A social-ecological or socio-ecological system consists of 'a bio-geo-physical' unit

and its associated social actors and institutions. Socio-ecological systems are com-

plex and adaptive and delimited by spatial or functional boundaries surrounding

particular ecosystems and their problem context (ICEM).

Climate change impact (or level of risk) is a function of the level of exposure to cli-

mate change induced threats, and the sensitivity of the target assets or system to

that exposure (ICEM).

A climate impact chain is a general representation of how a given climate stimulus

propagates through a system of interest via the direct and indirect impacts it entails.

(CIGRASP)

vi

Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA): A structured approach used to determine overall

preferences among different alternative options, where the options accomplish sev-

eral objectives that may not always complement one another (Department for

communities and local government, London 2009). In MCA, desired objectives are

specified and corresponding attributes or indicators are identified. The measurement

of these indicators is often based on a quantitative analysis (through scoring, ranking,

and weighting) of a wide range of qualitative impact categories and criteria.

(ISPONRE, DONRE, WWF, 2013a)

Natural farming systems are defined here as the harvesting and use of wild plant

and animal species that were once widely distributed throughout the region, and

which are now restricted to forested areas both within and outside protected areas.

Natural wetland areas are included in this definition. Natural farming systems are

closely integrated with other forms of traditional farming systems, providing a range

of livelihood activities that complement crop cultivation, livestock husbandry and

small scale aquaculture (ICEM).

Non-Timber Forest Products (NTFPs) includes all the materials collected from natural

or man-made forests and riverine habitats and used to support local livelihoods.

NTFPs include items such as forest and aquatic vegetables, fruit, traditional medicine

products, wild animals and aquatic organisms such as fish, molluscs, insects and crus-

taceans. While the term NTFP implies non-timber items, it does include wood prod-

ucts for home construction, fuel wood and charcoal and handicraft products.1

Crop Wild Relatives (CWRs) by comparison are often forgotten by all except the

agricultural crop researchers. They do not necessarily have an economic or even

subsistence value as do NTFPs. Their importance is as a source of genetic materials

for the improvement of existing crops, including the development of resistance to

disease and extremes of temperature and drought. CWRs exist side by side with

NTFPs in forests and in small patches of unused land.

The region also has a wide range of landraces and relatives of many economic

plants which are well-known as the region’s exports in the world market, for example,

durian, mangosteen, rambutan, jackfruit, and mango. A landrace is a local variety of

a domesticated animal or plant species which has developed largely by natural

processes, by adaptation to the natural and cultural environment in which it lives. It

differs from a formal breed which has been selectively bred deliberately to conform

to a particular formal, purebreed standard of traits. Landraces are usually more ge-

netically and physically diverse than formal breeds.

Vulnerability describes the degree to which a system is susceptible to, and unable

to cope with, adverse effects of climate change, including climate variability and

extremes. Vulnerability is a function of the character, magnitude, and rate of climate

change and variation to which a system is exposed, its sensitivity, and its adaptive

capacity (Parry et al. 2007 (IPCC). It is a function of the character, magnitude, and

1 NAFRI, NUoL, SNV (2007) Non-timber forest products in the Lao PDR. A manual of 100 com-

mercial and traditional products. The National Agriculture and Forestry Research Institute,

Vientiane, Lao PDR. Quoting Mollot et al (2004)

vii

rate of climate variation to which a system is exposed, its sensitivity and its adaptive

capacity. (GIZ 2013: 2).

Vulnerability assessments are methods that measure the vulnerability of an expo-

sure unit or system, e.g. the vulnerability of a community or a natural system like wa-

tersheds or ecosystems. Vulnerability assessments identify, quantify and prioritize the

vulnerabilities of that system. In general, it is possible to distinguish between top-

down vulnerability assessments approaches and bottom-up approaches. In inte-

grated approaches elements of both top-down and bottom-up are combined to

complement each other. (GIZ 2013: 2). In this particular project we are using Socio-

Ecological Systems as the basic unit on which Vulnerability Assessments are con-

ducted.

8

I. Introduction

1. Ecosystem-based Adaptation

1. As the world increasingly recognizes

the threats that increased climate vari-

ability and climate change pose to

both human societies and to the eco-

systems that support those societies,

many are searching for and testing out

a range of possible adaptation options.

Healthy and well-functioning ecosys-

tems are widely acknowledged to pro-

vide society with key services that en-

hance natural resilience to the adverse

impacts of climate change and reduce

the vulnerability of people, their liveli-

hood and economic activities, and their

built infrastructure, and thus a strong in-

terest has developed in Ecosystem-

based Adaptation (EbA).

2. EbA is defined as “the use of biodi-

versity and ecosystem services as part

of an overall adaptation strategy to

help people to adapt to the adverse ef-

fects of climate change” (Secretariat of

CBD, 2009).

3. EbA offers an additional or alterna-

tive set of possibilities to replace or

complement conventional approaches

to climate change adaptation that

usually rely on hard infrastructure and

traditional engineering such as sea-

walls, saline intrusion barriers, dykes,

dams, reservoirs, etc. As in many other

countries, these hard engineering ap-

proaches are currently the preferred or

“business-as-usual” solution in Vietnam.

EbA, on the other hand, uses “green in-

frastructure” and other “nature-based

solutions” to address climate change re-

lated issues. Some of the advantages of

EbA approaches are that they are

widely available to large segments of

the population, including the poor and

otherwise marginalized; they are often

cheaper than hard infrastructure solu-

tions; and they provide “co-benefits”

such as an improved natural resource

base, food supply, a source of income

for local people, and biodiversity con-

servation. Of course EbA approaches

may also have some disadvantages -

for example hard infrastructure defenc-

es provide their full protection effect as

soon as they are built - but restored

ecosystems such as replanted man-

groves may take many years before

they are mature enough to provide ef-

fective protection. Implementing EbA

approaches therefore requires changes

in practices and expectations and con-

sequently may be more complicated

for government officials to report on.

4. EbA is applicable at all levels and

scales from local to international. EbA

provides an approach that incorporates

comprehensive measures promoting

development through ecosystem man-

agement. Such measures include, for

example, interventions related to sus-

tainable agriculture, integrated water

resource management, integrated

coastal and marine management and

sustainable forest management that use

nature to reduce vulnerability to climate

change. Through a focus on conserva-

tion, restoration and management of

ecosystems, EbA at the same time en-

sures that the resilience of the ecosys-

tems themselves is maintained or im-

proved.

2. “Mainstreaming EbA in Vi-

etnam”

3. The GIZ project “Strategic Main-

streaming of EbA in Vietnam” is working

to promote EbA approaches in Climate

Change Adaptation planning across

government policy and planning sys-

9

tems. Institutional considerations are

thus important. While much of CCA pol-

icy is produced at the national level,

practical planning for CCA is primarily

the responsibility of the Provincial Peo-

ples’ Committees. Thus, as part of its

portfolio of activities the project has se-

lected two provinces - Quang Binh and

Ha Tinh to demonstrate EbA vulnerability

assessments and identify EbA interven-

tions.

4. The EbA vulnerability assessments are

to be conducted in two main stages,

first at the province-wide level, and then

subsequently at the community level or

local-scale in selected areas. The prov-

ince-wide VA is intended to enable a

province to get a comprehensive over-

view of climate change issues and iden-

tify priorities for action. The province-

level VA is “top down”, and uses existing

information on the province’s ecologi-

cal, social and economic assets; its his-

tory of climate-related hazards; as well

as development trends and down-

scaled climate change projections to

identify priority climate change adapta-

tion issues and general province-wide

EbA solutions. The province-wide as-

sessment also provides the basis for

identifying a short-list of specific sites for

selection of the local level VA. The local

level VA then focuses on a selected ar-

ea and repeats the analysis of ecologi-

cal, social and economic factors at the

local level, applying more conventional

bottom-up methods of field work, local

data collection and stakeholder partic-

ipation, to better understand locally im-

portant climate change issues and

identify specific, implementable EbA so-

lutions. The results and analysis from

both assessments will be made availa-

ble as a stand-alone Provincial Vulnera-

bility Assessment Report; and one or

more stand-alone Community Vulnera-

bility Assessment Reports for each prov-

ince. Together they will provide clear

sets of recommendations for both pro-

vincial and local levels.

3. The need for a new approach

4. The EbA vulnerability assessments are

intended to demonstrate an approach

that can be easily understood and rep-

licated by other provincial governments

using existing data and relatively limited

national consultant collaboration. A

wide range of climate change vulnera-

bility assessment methodologies has

emerged over the last decade, and a

number of reviews, comparisons and

compilations of these approaches are

available (Balangue, 2013; Garg et. al.,

2007; Morgan 2011; Provia, 2013; Rizvi et.

al. 2015; Schipper et. al. 2010; UNFCCC,

2008). Further, recent VAs in Southeast

Asia provide concrete examples. These

have focused on the wetlands of the

Lower Mekong Basin (ICEM, 2011); an

assessment that has ranked relative vul-

nerability of different provinces to identi-

fy Hot Spot Provinces in the Lower Me-

kong River Basin (USAID Mekong ARCC,

2013); a significant stretch of the Me-

kong River (WWF, 2014); a single ecosys-

tem such as a Ramsar Wetland (e.g.

Meynell et. al., 2014) or on urban cen-

tres (e.g. ICEM, 2015).

5. However, many of these are very

complex and none involves detailed

vulnerability assessments and adapta-

tion interventions at larger scale such as

entire provinces, encompassing a di-

verse range of ecosystems, livelihoods,

built infrastructure and other economic

assets. In addition, while many identify

the need to focus vulnerability assess-

ments and climate change adaptation

work on “socio-ecological systems”

10

(SES), none of them provide a method-

ology for identifying an SES, assessing

impacts of climate change on SESs, or

even a clear definition of what consti-

tutes an SES. This project is using the def-

inition that socio-ecological systems are:

“complex bio-geo-physical units to-

gether with social and institutional

actors and their activities”

6. The concept recognizes that social,

economic and ecological systems are

inextricably linked, and that any separa-

tion is artificial and arbitrary. While SESs

may be delineated by either spatial or

functional boundaries, and their scale

can be very variable, in practice they

are still difficult to identify conclusively

and consistently. This project is testing

out an approach to first identifying and

mapping SESs across the entire prov-

ince, then describing priority SESs as the

entry point for further steps of the vul-

nerability assessment, and as the targets

for implementation of EbA recommen-

dations.

7. At the same time, the approach be-

ing used here recognizes that not every-

thing in a province can be neatly cate-

gorized as belonging to a single type of

SES. Some things cut across many differ-

ent SESs. For this reason we are also in-

troducing the concept of Key Economic

Activities/Assets (KEA) to include both

large scale infrastructure that supports

economic activity across the province

(e.g. in the transport, energy and water

sectors), as well as Special Economic

Zones (SEZs).

8. The GIZ/ISPONRE EbA project’s ap-

proach of starting with a provincial level

vulnerability assessment before focusing

at the micro-level; and of simplifying the

overall process is already innovative

and requires more detailed description.

In addition the use of SESs and KEAs as

the key entry point is also novel, and al-

so requires further explanation and de-

scription. This report therefore sets out

the overall EbA vulnerability assessment

approach as it is being developed and

tested. It should be read before reading

the provincial reports for either Quang

Binh or Ha Tinh.

II. Vulnerability Assessment for Eco-

system-based Adaptation: Concepts

and Definitions

9. The overall implementation of the

Vulnerability Assessment (VA) requires (i)

a conceptual approach that guides the

implementation; (ii) a set of methods to

be applied under that approach, and

(iii) a number of tools that are used in

each of those methods. This Brief is lay-

ing out the first of these – the overall

approach being used.

Table 1: Definition of Approach,

Methods and Tools

Approach A broad strategy and pro-

cess for an entire assess-

ment.

Method A set or sequence of steps

followed to accomplish a

specific task within a larger

framework.

Tool A means or instrument by

which a specific task is ac-

complished

Source: Adapted from UNFCCC 2008

10. The conceptual starting point for the

approach adopted here is the under-

standing of vulnerability as originally de-

fined by the IPCC (2007) and now

commonly accepted. Vulnerability is

11

defined as the degree to which some-

thing (a species, an ecosystem, a group

of people, a set of activities, built infra-

structure, etc.) is susceptible to, or una-

ble to cope with, the adverse effects of

climate change, including climate vari-

ability and extremes. Vulnerability is fur-

ther explained as a function of the

character, magnitude, and rate of cli-

mate variation to which a sys-

tem/species is exposed, the sys-

tem/species’ sensitivity, and the sys-

tem/species’ adaptive capacity (IPCC,

2007). Figure 1 presents this relationship

visually/graphically.

Figure 1: The components of vulnerabil-

ity (from Marshall et al. 2009; Preston

and Stafford-Smith, 2009)

11. Exposure is defined as the extent to

which a region, resource or community

experiences changes in climate. It is

characterised by the magnitude, fre-

quency, duration and/or spatial extent

of a weather event or pattern. Some

regions or sectors or groups of people or

species are more exposed to extreme

climate hazards than others because of

their location

12. Sensitivity is defined as the degree

to which a system is affected by, or re-

sponsive to, climate changes. The sensi-

tivity of ecological systems to climate

change is normally described in terms of

physiological tolerances to change

and/or variability in physical and chem-

ical conditions (i.e. temperature, pH,

etc.). Sensitivity of social systems de-

pends on a range of economic, politi-

cal, cultural technological and institu-

tional factors.

13. Together, exposure and sensitivity

describe the potential impact of a cli-

mate event or change upon an object.

However, to understand vulnerability,

this interaction of exposure and sensitivi-

ty on the ground, is moderated by

adaptive capacity.

14. Adaptive capacity refers to the

ability of the system to change in a way

that makes it better equipped to man-

age its exposure and/or sensitivity to a

threat. Although a broad range of fac-

tors have been identified which are re-

ported to reflect adaptive capacity, it

remains a difficult concept to define

explicitly within vulnerability assessments

(Adger and Vincent, 2005). Adaptive

capacity can refer to the natural ability

of the system to adjust to change (e.g.

for an ecosystem to retreat inland over

time in response to rising sea levels) or to

human resource availability and capac-

ity to manage the system to adjust to

change (e.g. human, technological,

and financial capital) as well as the ca-

pacity and political will of governance

structures to deploy those resources.

15. While this understanding of vulnera-

bility appears attractive, it is not neces-

sarily a straightforward matter to apply it

to either complex ecological systems or

complex social systems, even when

considering either of these in isolation.

Added to this, in the real world, what we

are dealing with are actually combined

socio-ecological systems that are even

more complex.

12

16. Figure 2 shows the linkages between

ecological vulnerability of one ecosys-

tem, and the socio-economic vulnera-

bility of a group of people who are de-

pendent on one or more resources pro-

vided by that ecosystem.

Figure2: Linking ecological vulnerability and socio-economic vulnerability (from Mar-

shall et. al., 2009)

17. We therefore need to develop an

approach to explain and provide prac-

tical guidance for conducting Vulnera-

bility Assessments to identify EbA options

at both the provincial level, and in local

level sites, as part of an integrated so-

cio-ecological approach to vulnerability

assessments and ecosystem-based cli-

mate change adaptation.

18. The proposed VASES Approach be-

ing developed and tested in this project

is underpinned by a conceptual under-

standing of the basic elements of the re-

lationship between societies and eco-

systems, and the fundamental im-

portance of ecosystem services in this

relationship. The natural structure and

functioning of ecosystems generates

goods and services that are of benefit

to society. These are commonly referred

to as “Ecosystem Services”.

19. The simplest definition of Ecosystem

Services is “all the different ways in

which humans benefit from ecosys-

tems”. The Millennium Ecosystem As-

sessment categorized ecosystem ser-

vices into 4 groups, namely provisioning,

regulating, supporting, and cultural ser-

vices (see Box 1). At the same time so-

ciety uses and manages the habitats

and species that are found in the eco-

system in many different ways (some of

which may be more sustainable than

others). The conceptual basis then

gradually incorporates additional ele-

ments, of both non-climate related de-

velopment trends, and then of climate-

related impacts, before moving on to

consider existing adaptive capacity,

and finally an identification of overall

vulnerability. Based on this, adaptation

options can then be identified.

13

Box 1: Ecosystem Services

Types of Ecosystem Services (after

MEA, 2005)

Provisioning:

Benefits we get from products of eco-

systems (food fibre, energy, materials,

medicine)

Regulating:

Benefits we get from ecosystem pro-

cesses (air, water and climate regula-

tion; pest and disease- control; protec-

tion from erosion, storms and other natu-

ral hazards, etc.)

Cultural-spiritual:

Non-material benefits we get from na-

ture (spiritual, aesthetic, recreation,

health)

Supporting:

The services necessary to create all the

other services (soil formation, photosyn-

thesis, nutrient and water cycling, polli-

nation)

III. Implementation of the proposed

VASES Approach

20. Implementation of the VASES Ap-

proach consists of four main compo-

nents (essentially these are the same at

the provincial and the local/community

levels):

1. Scoping the context for climate

change vulnerability assess-

ment and EbA:

Baseline and trends in ecolo-

gy, society and economy

Identification of major cli-

mate-related hazards and

their trends

2. Identification and prioritisation

of socio-ecological systems

(SES) and key economic assets

(KEA)

3. Vulnerability Assessment for

priority SESs and KEAs

Climate Change Impact As-

sessment

Adaptive Capacity Assess-

ment

4. Identification of EbA and other

related options

21. These steps are described in

more detail below. Additional infor-

mation on specific topics and data

sources is provided in Annex 1.

1. Scoping the Provincial context

for climate change

22. Broadly speaking “scoping” is an

early project start-up activity conduct-

ed to bring focus to a broadly con-

ceived study and determine the specif-

ic features it will encompass. Clearly,

with a challenge such as climate

change, many angles could be pur-

sued; not all would be equally im-

portant. The purpose of scoping is then

to identify and prioritise the important is-

sues that will be considered in the as-

sessment, and that will lead to the most

necessary and implementable EbA solu-

tions. Scoping will be considered in

terms of a number of “profiles”, each of

which will be presented as a chapter in

the report. Below, an overview is pro-

vided of the contents of each pro-

file/chapter.

Baselines and trends in ecology, so-

ciety, the economy, and climate

23. Ecological Profile: The Ecological

Profile examines, maps and assesses the

province’s ecological context, consider-

ing the major ecosystems present, and

the geology, topography, (slope) soils,

hydrology and prevailing climate asso-

ciated with them. A baseline situation is

described, and an assessment of trends

14

is used to make projections of future

scenarios for ecosystem extent and

condition. Baseline data exists, although

the type and level of detail may vary

from province to province, and access-

ing the data may be problematic. More

difficult will be the detection and pro-

jection of trends, but for forest cover

and quality (type and condition), some

data should be available.

24. Economic Profile: The Economic

Profile examines how the (provincial or

local) economy is structured, identifying

(and where possible mapping) the “key

assets, actors and activities” in each

sector. The baseline situation looks at

sectors that are important now, and

that will be important in the future, ac-

cording to (provincial or commune) de-

velopment trends and plans. It address-

es the question what, from an econom-

ic perspective, should the EbA vulnera-

bility assessment focus on? Narrative

accounts of the economy can be

found in the provincial Socio-Economic

Development Plans. The annual provin-

cial statistics books provide quantitative

overviews of the provincial economy,

broadly differentiated by sector and

within sectors, but are typically a year

out of date. Most recent data, and

maps need to be requested from indi-

vidual departments. Digital data sets

and maps are not always available,

and some data is not available for free.

At the end of the day the quality of the

profiles produced will depend on the

quality, quantity and timeliness of the in-

formation provided by provincial in-

formants.

25. Social Profile: The Social Profile pro-

vides an account of the province’s or

community’s human population and

asks who will be most vulnerable to cli-

mate change, to what degree and

why, now and in the future. What pro-

spects are there for adaptation and

what social trends are likely to increase

or decrease vulnerability? Important

considerations include population size

and structure (including ethnic minorities

and other potentially vulnerable groups)

population distribution and growth

rates, livelihoods, resource tenure, pov-

erty and migration.

26. Climate Profile: This describes the

province’s “baseline” climate, and its

history of extreme climatic events, sup-

plemented by discussion with key in-

formants at the provincial level on past

climate and extreme weather events,

and their impacts; observed trends over

time; and issues of concern.

2. Identification of Socio-

Ecological Systems and Key

Economic Assets

27. Based on the understandings de-

veloped in the economic, social and

ecological profiles, and using the expert

judgement of team members, a series

of SESs and KEAs can be identified for

each province. A preliminary identifica-

tion will initially be produced for discus-

sion and debate within the team until

consensus is reached. Use of Google

Earth images to identify different types

of land cover, infrastructure and human

activities; combined with a series of field

visits covering as many different types of

areas as possible within the provinces;

and use of both existing and newly pre-

pared maps developed by the project,

are all extremely important aspects of

this iterative approach.

28. The SES and KEA will then be ranked

in importance, in light of the ecological,

social, economic and climate factors

discussed in the profiles, such as: geo-

graphic extent; number of people in-

15

volved; present and projected future

contribution to the economy; impacts

of past extreme climate events, etc. In-

dividual rankings of SESs proposed by

each team member will be combined

into an overall score consensus score af-

ter discussion and agreement within the

team. A selection of the top prioritized

SES/KEA will then be described in more

detail, including an inventory and as-

sessment of the key ecosystem services

that support them.

29. SES and KEA Profile: An SES Profile

will be prepared for each province, pre-

senting an overall classification of its

SESs and KEAs, an SES/KEA mapping of

the entire province, and descriptions of

some of the priority systems as well as an

assessment of the important ecosystem

services that support them.

3. Vulnerability Assessment of So-

cio-Ecological Systems and Key

Economic Assets

Identifying Major Threats from Cli-

mate Change

30. The 2012 officially approved MONRE-

IMHEN climate change projections

based on the IPCC 4th Assessment were

used to identify parameters of the pos-

sible future climates of both Quang Binh

and Ha Tinh provinces. Using information

on past climate conditions and ob-

served trends; as well as knowledge

about which aspects of climate are im-

portant for the selected priority SESs in

each province, 7 key parameters of

climate change were selected for use in

the SES Vulnerability Assessment (in-

crease in mean overall temperature; in-

creases in number of very hot days; in-

crease in number of dry days; decreas-

es in rainfall in the dry season; increase

in rainfall in the rainy season; changes in

storm patterns; and sea level rise).

Assessment of Impact

31. Increasingly climate change is identi-

fied as a source of additional pressures

on ecosystems, societies and econo-

mies. As explained above, ‘potential

impact’ is a function of exposure and

sensitivity.

32. Using available information and ex-

pert judgement the team assigned

scores for exposure and sensitivity of

each individual SES or KEA to each of

the 7 climate measures identified

above. Plotting the exposure scores

against the sensitivity scores in a matrix

similar to that shown in figure 3 below,

identifies the scores for potential impact

of each of the 7 selected parameters of

climate change for each SES/KEA.

Figure 3: Potential impact matrix: the re-

lationship between exposure and sensi-

tivity in determining the degree of po-

tential impact (Hills & Bennett, 2010)

33. At the provincial level, potential im-

pact matrices can be developed for

the different priority socio-ecological

systems and key economic assets identi-

16

fied in the scoping and baseline. At the

community level, potential impact ma-

trices can be developed for more finely

defined areas.

Assessment of the Adaptive Capacity

of SES and KEA

34. With this understanding we can

now move on to assess a Socio-

Ecological System’s existing capacity to

adapt to likely impacts. In this case it is

useful to consider that ecosystems have

limits beyond which they cannot func-

tion effectively, but these limits are

complex and the thresholds are not al-

ways predictable. Sometimes it can

take a long time for any impacts to be-

come visible. Natural processes work on

very different time-scales than human

societies. After an extreme event peo-

ple are often heard saying things like “a

flood like this has never happened be-

fore in living memory” when in fact such

a flood could be a regular feature of

say a 200- year natural flood cycle of

the river. The different time-frames of

human cycles and natural cycles must

be recognized and considered.

35. The following components of adap-

tive capacity have been suggested

(Marshall et. al. 2009)

The capacity to experiment and

learn

The capacity to re-organise

Flexibility (social, cultural, politi-

cal, economic)

The availability of As-

sets/Capitals (natural, econom-

ic, social-cultural, physical [built]

and human)

Gender relations

Social norms and institutions

Flexibility of markets

Environmental Institutions

Culture of corruption

Overall Vulnerability Assessment

36. Once again using a combination of

existing information compiled,

knowledge of provincial and local in-

formants and expert judgement of

team members, scores can be assigned

for adaptive capacity of each SES/KEA

to each of the 7 chosen climate

change parameters. Then matrices can

be constructed plotting the scores for

potential impact against the scores for

adaptive capacity (similar to Figure 4

below). This allows us to identify overall

vulnerability scores, for each of the 7

climate factors in each of the SES/KEAs.

Finally the mean overall vulnerability

score of each SES/KEA can be calcu-

lated as the average of all 7 vulnerabil-

ity scores for the different climate fac-

tors.

Figure 4: Vulnerability matrix: the rela-

tionship between potential impact and

adaptive capacity in determining the

degree of ecological vulnerability (Hills

& Bennett 2010)

4. Identifying EbA and other Ad-

aptation Options

37. In general, the approach to identify-

ing adaptation options is as follows”

17

Review most vulnerable

SES/KEAs

Identify where adaptation re-

sponses are needed

Define ecosystem-based and

other adaptation options

Prioritise options

Identify synergies (packages

of interventions)

38. As vulnerability is a function of three

elements - exposure, sensitivity and

adaptive capacity, then EbA interven-

tions could logically include actions to

manage or reduce exposure; manage

or reduce sensitivity; and strengthen

adaptive capacity. In practical terms

though most activities targeting re-

duced exposure or reduced sensitivity

will probably be implemented through

increasing adaptive capacity first (see

Figure 5).

Figure 5: Conceptual Framework for EbA interventions

39. Furthermore, EbA interventions can

be identified by:

a) Identifying what can be done to

help restore ecosystems, main-

tain them in good condition,

and enable them to adapt to

climate stresses, as well as re-

ducing non-climate stresses on

ecosystems

Effective management of natural re-

sources and ecosystem services can only

be achieved by working at multiple

scales, including large scales such as wa-

tersheds, landscapes, river reaches and

coastal stretches. This often requires

government-led action to put in place

appropriate management prescriptions

(such as designation of protected areas,

and specification of management regu-

lations, etc.). However, community-led or

community-driven approaches can also

be effective at spatial scales much larg-

er than the immediate surroundings of a

community

18

b) Identifying how ecosystem ser-

vices can be best used to help

different social groups (and es-

pecially the most vulnerable

people) adapt to climate

change impacts

In addition to the fact that the ecosys-

tems themselves may be changing as a

result of climate change, at the same

time human dependence on those eco-

systems and their services may also

change as a result of climate change.

Depending on what happens to their

economic and livelihood activities, peo-

ple in the area of the assessment may

become more dependent on the plants,

animals and ecological services availa-

ble to them in the future. How can this

be made more sustainable than in the

present situation? What new ways can

be found to harness ecosystem services

for even greater benefits?

c) Identifying how ecosystems can

help protect important infra-

structure from damage that

might be caused by climate

change (“climate-proofing”)

Improved management of watersheds

can reduce land-slide threats to roads,

and can reduce erosion that causes rap-

id siltation of reservoirs, reducing their

working life, and can reduce infrastruc-

ture damage caused by downstream

floods.

d) Identifying “Climate-smart” ag-

riculture interventions

Not all climate smart agriculture interven-

tions may truly be considered as EbA,

although some of them undoubtedly

are. So for example improved housing for

livestock that reduces their exposure to

high temperatures that cause stress and

reduced production, is climate-smart but

not EbA. On the other hand maintaining

patches of natural habitat within the

farm landscape as a source of natural

pollinators and for biological pest con-

trol, is definitely an EbA approach. In

practical terms recommendations for

climate smart agriculture may be bun-

dled into packages that include ele-

ments that are both EbA and non-EbA

together.

After identifying a potentially wide range

of EbA and other related options, it will

be necessary to conduct some form of

prioritization. In this case criteria can be

developed to rank proposed interven-

tions.

e) Identifying policy, strategy,

planning, financial and institu-

tional reforms that would trans-

late into more effective adap-

tive capacity

Interventions such as policy that supports

co-management arrangements with

shared responsibilities between govern-

ment agencies and communities in natu-

ral resource management; mainstream-

ing the response to climate change in

planning systems across multiple sectors;

effective institutional arrangements that

support networking and collaboration

between communities in a shared land-

scape/seascape; and Innovative financ-

ing mechanisms such as Payment for En-

vironmental Services (PES) will be im-

portant in improving adaptive capacity.

After identification of a range of possible

interventions, ranking should be carried

out using agreed criteria (such as those

identified in Table 2).

19

Table 2: criteria used to rank adaptation interventions (adapted from IUCN,

Marshall et al. 2009)

Criteria for

adaptation

Description Action

Need Individuals, communities and sec-

tors will vary in the extent and im-

mediacy of their vulnerability to

climate change.

Decision-makers should rank

candidates for adaptation using

transparent methods for equita-

ble resource allocation. They

should establish clear criteria for

evaluating need and recognis-

ing urgency in adaptation.

Benefit Benefits of adaptation actions will

vary considerably between actors -

can assist with decisions between

sectors/regions in which to invest in

adaptation action.

Prioritising groups/regions should

be done with the development

of clear criteria for evaluating

benefit- through comparative

assessments of econom-

ic/social/environmental value.

Scale of

Impact

Some interventions may only have

an impact at a very local scale,

whereas others may have a much

broader impact

Prioritisation and decision-

making should take into account

the scale of the impact

Feasibility Some adaptation options can be

infeasible in practice. Reducing

vulnerabilities might be economi-

cally/technically/politically too

challenging.

Feasibility analysis will help identi-

fy strategies which are more

practicable. In instances where

this is difficult to evaluate- risk-

based approach can help with

decision making in the face of

uncertainty.

Costs Adaptation options vary greatly in

cost - inexpensive options may de-

liver major benefits with great cer-

tainty.

Weighing up costs against feasi-

bility and likely benefits. Decision

makers should consider the na-

ture of the vulnerability, the type

of adaptation strategy and the

institutional context of the adap-

tation initiative.

40. In a more general sense it is also im-

portant to consider

Promoting local and long-term

adaptation solutions that provide

security to both people and na-

ture

Addressing governance issues in-

cluding resource tenure and ac-

cess as part of adaptation - in

many cases successful adapta-

tion cannot be achieved if

20

significant progress is not made on

these issues first

Building on local innovation and

sharing approaches and experi-

ence between communities, or-

ganizations and provinces, sup-

porting the development of ca-

pacity at all levels.

IV. Additional considerations

41. Considering all of the complex inter-

actions between societies, economies

and ecosystems, it is therefore very clear

that to conduct effective vulnerability

assessments we need to work in teams

that include expertise and experience in

social, economic and ecological as-

pects. We also need a simple overall

approach that goes beyond the IPCC

idea, to guide and help integrate our

thinking.

42. It is extremely important that local

government stakeholders engage in the

process productively. On the one hand

their participation is absolutely necessary

to provide access to provincial data and

information (as well as their own

knowledge and experience) to inform

the assessment process, while on the

other hand their active participation is

also a form of capacity-building for

them, through which they can learn the

approaches and techniques being used,

and benefit from interactions with na-

tional (and in this case international) ex-

perts.

V. Conclusion

43. What is proposed here provides a

structured approach to designing and

implementing multi-scalar vulnerability

assessments of complex systems for EbA.

It is innovative in proposing to implement

province-wide vulnerability assessments,

and it is innovative in attempting to iden-

tify specific socio-ecological systems and

then use them as the entry point for im-

pact assessment. At the same time, it is

attempting to balance this level of com-

plexity with the need to develop an ap-

proach that is understandable and repli-

cable by provincial authorities. The

Quang Binh and Ha Tinh vulnerability as-

sessments will provide the first opportuni-

ties to test this out in practice. Experience

and lessons learned from these pilots will

be used to inform any necessary adjust-

ments to the approach in a revision at

the end of the project.

Report 1 – Overall Approach: Vulnerability Assessment for Socio-Ecological Systems (VASES)

21

Annex

The VASES Approach: 4 Steps for Vulnerability Assessment of

Socio-Ecological Systems and Identification of EbA Options

Annex 1 provides a matrix of the information that is needed in relation to each step

(1-4) of the VASES Framework, and the methods that can be applied and the range

of tools that may be used to generate that information. The list of methods and tools

is intended to be more indicative rather than either overly prescriptive or exhaustive

at this stage. More detailed descriptions of each of the key methods/groups of tools

identified in the table (i.e. CARE’s “Climate Vulnerability and Capacity Assessment

(CVCA)”, ICEM’s “Climate Change Adaptation and Mitigation Methodology

(CAM)”, SDF/IUCN’s “CREATE” , IUCN/University of Bern’s “PLI”, IISD’s “CRiSTAL” and

general PRA tools will be described in more detail as and when they are actually

used.

Report 1 – Overall Approach: Vulnerability Assessment for Socio-Ecological Systems (VASES)

22

Stages and Steps Scope/Objectives Data Sources and Methods Output

1. Scoping provin-

cial context: base-

line and trends

Meetings with ISPONRE, GIZ and ICEM teams

(a) Ecosystem and

Ecosystem Services

Profile

Understanding key

ecosystems and the

services they pro-

vide

(Can be applied at

Provincial level and

local level such as

sub-catchment, river

reach, coastal

stretch, cluster of

communities or indi-

vidual community)

Provincial/local: Understanding main habitat

types, their extent and connectivity species im-

portant for economy, culture and food security;

ecosystem services important for local livelihoods,

economy well-being, etc. as well as the trends in

what is happening to these ecosystems over time

Provincial:

Literature review, provincial meetings, expert opinion

The UNREDD programme Forest Ecological Stratifi-

cation study for Viet Nam in 2011.

WWF (2013) comprehensive study of the Ecosys-

tems of the Greater Mekong Region, including all

Vietnam

WWF (2013) Ecosystems Classification Mapping of

Vietnam

USAID (2013) Vietnam Tropical Forest and Biodiver-

sity Assessment

WWF Ecoregions

http://www.worldwildlife.org/ecoregions

Local: Community or local level mapping, supported

by drone images, or Google Earth.

Provincial

Ecosystem

Profile

Local Ecosys-

tem Profile

(b) Economic Pro-

file

(Profile of whole

Provincial: Understanding the overall economic

context - major economic sectors and activities

supporting GDP, tax revenue, employment, etc.

and how they are changing over time. Also major

Provincial: Literature review, expert opinion, key in-

formant interviews, focal group discussions;

Local: PRA Methods and tools e.g. community

Provincial

Economic

Profile

Local Eco-

Report 1 – Overall Approach: Vulnerability Assessment for Socio-Ecological Systems (VASES)

23

Province and of in-

dividual villages or

clusters of villages

with similar liveli-

hoods in shared

ecosystem at local

level)

infrastructure supporting the economy, and future

development plans

Local: Understanding the economy at a more lo-

cal level including patterns of major livelihood ac-

tivities , including their dependency on ecosystem

services

mapping, community transects, historical timelines,

seasonal calendars, risk mapping, ranking exercises,

market surveys, household consumption surveys, etc.

nomic and

Livelihood

Profile

(c) Social profile

(Profile of whole

Province and of in-

dividual villages or

clusters of villages

with similar liveli-

hoods in shared

ecosystem at local

level)

Provincial: understanding the overall socio-

cultural, context of the province including ethnici-

ty, poverty, migration, etc.

Local: Understanding the social dynamics in a se-

lected locality - livelihoods and culture of commu-

nities including how they use and manage natural

resources

Provincial: Literature review, expert opinion, key in-

formant interviews, focal group discussions;

Local: PRA Methods and tools e.g. community map-

ping, community transects, historical timelines, sea-

sonal calendars, risk mapping, ranking exercises,

market surveys, household consumption surveys, etc.

Social Profile

(d) Climate Profile Understanding current climate characteristics in

the local area, previous extreme events and major

concerns on climate risk from the perspective of

different stakeholders;

Provincial: Current climate information and Infor-

mation on past extreme events from provincial

sources

Local: Climate risk mapping, climate risk calendar

and seasonal (livelihood) calendar, Venn diagrams,

timelines, historical transects, etc.

Provincial

Climate Pro-

file

Local climate

profile and

risk map

2. Identification

description and

mapping of SESs

Identification of all SESs and KEAs in each Province,

ranking of their importance, fuller descriptions of

selected priorities in each province and short-list for

Information in profiles a-d, and mapped information

collected or prepared for these profiles; Google

Earth, expert knowledge and opinion of team mem-

Provincial SES

and KEA Pro-

file

Report 1 – Overall Approach: Vulnerability Assessment for Socio-Ecological Systems (VASES)

24

and KEAs selection for micro-level assessment. Mapping of

priority SES and KEAs

bers

3. Vulnerability As-

sessment of priority

SESs and KEAs

(a)Identifying po-

tential impacts on

SESs and KEAs

Provincial:

Understanding potential climate impacts on priori-

ty SESs, main sectors of provincial economy, im-

portant production systems, and key infrastructure

assets, including both exposure and sensitivity to

climate risks. This includes consideration of how

ecosystem functions and processes, habitat extent

and condition and species will change under pres-

sure of climate impacts

These climate impacts also have to be seen in the

context of understanding how broad economic

development trends are already putting pressure

on the ecosystems, and are at the same time put-

ting pressures on livelihoods and the way of life in

the province

Local:

Understanding how communities dependence on

ecosystem services will change, and the way they

use and manage ecosystems under the conditions

of changing climate – including changes in which

Provincial:

ICEM CAM Methodology

Downscaled Climate Projections overlay on key SESs

and KEAs, Hydrological modelling

Review of government policies and plans and private

sector investment, key informants interviews, focus

group discussions.

Assessing impacts of past extreme variation in climate

pattern or extreme weather events on species and

habitats, and their ability/speed of recovery.

Local:

Tools for ecosystem services site-based assessment

(TESSA)

SDF/IUCN “CREATE” (Shott and Mather, 2012) and/or

CARE CVCA Methods (Daze et. al. 2009).

Impact matrix

and narrative

for priority

SESs and KEAs

Impact matrix

and narrative

for local level

Report 1 – Overall Approach: Vulnerability Assessment for Socio-Ecological Systems (VASES)

25

products and how much of them are harvested;

how much is consumed in the household and how

much is sold; changes in customary rights, resource

access/tenure and locally agreed use rules;

changes in community-based management insti-

tutions;

Climate risk mapping, climate risk calendar and sea-

sonal (livelihood) calendar, Venn diagrams, timelines,

historical transects, etc.

(b) Adaptive Ca-

pacity of SES and

KEAs

Provincial: Under-

standing Adaptive

Capacity at the

Provincial level

Local: Understand-

ing Adaptive Ca-

pacity at the Com-

munity Level

Provincial: Understanding the extent to which

provincial policy, investment decisions, regulations

and standards, institutional structures, planning

processes, and management regimes support ef-

fective adaptation. Understanding previous re-

sponses to extreme events at the provincial level.

Also understanding how ecosystems and their

component species and habitats are able to re-

spond and adapt to climate impacts.

Local: Understanding the extent to which com-

munity-based institutions and different user-

groups/interest groups can support changes in live-

lihoods, agricultural practices and local use of

natural resources. Understanding household cop-

ing strategies in response to previous extreme

events.

Provincial: Literature review, expert opinion, key in-

formant interviews, spatial analysis

Local: SDF/IUCN CREATE tools (Shott and Mather

2012) + University of Bern/IUCN PLI tools (Roth and Rist,

2012)

Description of

Provincial

Adaptive

Capacity

Description of

local adap-

tive capacity

(c) Overall Vulner-

ability Assessment

= (exposure x sensi-

tivity)

/adaptive capacity

Provincial: Vulnerability of priority SESs and key in-

frastructure supporting large-scale economic ac-

tivity

ICEM CAM Methodology

Ranking of cells in matrix of Potential Impacts versus

adaptive capacity (Can be applied at both provin-

cial and local levels)

Vulnerability

scores and

ranking of 10

key SESs

Key local vul-

Report 1 – Overall Approach: Vulnerability Assessment for Socio-Ecological Systems (VASES)

26

Local: Vulnerability of specific examples of select-

ed SESs

nerabilities

that need to

be addressed

4. Identifying EbA

Options for SESs

and KEAs

Provincial:

- what changes in provincial policy, investment

decisions, regulations and standards, institutional

structures, planning processes and management

regimes will support adaptation, including by

maintaining or enhancing the future flow of envi-

ronmental services that supports provincial devel-

opment

- what conservation and restoration or other man-

agement action to be undertaken or led by gov-

ernment agencies will enhance adaptation e.g.:

establishment of new protected areas,

expansion of core zones

changes in use rules in buffer zones

provision of increased resources for forest fire

management

changes of harvest quota and plot size in pro-

duction forest

increasing use of native species in production

forest plantations

Increasing diversity of species in coastal protec-

tion forests

Etc.

- how can ecosystems be used to help “climate

Provincial: ICEM CAM Method, Literature review,

expert opinion; adoption of best practice. ADB

Guidelines (ADB 2011; 2012; 2013)

List of poten-

tial EbA op-

tions at pro-

vincial level

with initial

prioritization

and

one or two

concept

notes

Short-list of

proposed

EbA interven-

tions at the

local level

Report 1 – Overall Approach: Vulnerability Assessment for Socio-Ecological Systems (VASES)

27

proof” infrastructure and support sustainability of

key economic sectors in the face of climate im-

pacts

- which “climate-smart” agriculture interventions

could be widely applicable across large areas

Local:

Identifying opportunities for community-based insti-

tutions to conserve and restore species and habi-

tats through e.g.Changes to access and tenure

rules and agreements

Changes to fishing/harvesting/collecting/ hunt-

ing, areas, periods, gear or allowed quota

Establishing closed seasons or no-take zones

Etc.

Identifying how households can change compo-

nents of their livelihoods, change their agricultural

practices and change their use of natural re-

sources and management of ecosystems for sus-

tainable long-term CCA/resilience benefits (espe-

cially for the most vulnerable groups).

Identifying how ecosystems can help “climate-

proof important community infrastructure

Local: CREATE, (Shott and Mather, 2012) PL(Roth and

Rast 2012) and CRiSTAL (www.cristaltool.org)

community meetings and discussions

28

References

ADB (2011) Guidelines for Climate Proofing Investment in the Transport Sector: Road

Infrastructure Projects

ADB (2012) Guidelines for Climate Proofing Investment in Agriculture, Rural Develop-

ment, and Food Security

ADB (2013) Guidelines for Climate Proofing Investment in the Energy Sector

Adger, W. N. and Vincent, K., 2005.Uncertainty in adaptive capacity. (IPCC Special

Issue on ‘Describing Uncertainties in Climate Change to Support Analysis of Risk and

Options’) Comptes Rendus Geoscience 337(4), 399-410.

Balangue, Tonie O, (2013) Compendium of Climate Change Vulnerability and Im-

pact Assessment Tools, Climate Change Commission, Philippines.

Bezuijen, M.R., Morgan, C, Mather R.J (2011) A Rapid Vulnerability Assessment of

Coastal Habitats and Selected Species to Climate Risks in Chanthaburi and Trat

(Thailand), Koh Kong and Kampot (Cambodia), and KienGiang, Ben Tre, Soc Trang

and Can Gio (Vietnam). Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Carg, Amit, et. al., (2007) Handbook of Current and Next Generation Vulnerability

and Adaptation Assessment Tools

Chapin, F. S., G. P. Kofinas, and C. Folke. (Eds). 2009. Principles of ecosystem steward-

ship: resilience-based natural resource management in a changing world. New York:

Springer Science and Business Media.

CRiSTAL Manual tool: www.cristaltool.org

Dazé, A. , Ambrose K. and Ehrhart C. (2009). “Climate Vulnerability and Capacity

Analysis Handbook”. CARE International.

http://www.careclimatechange.org/files/adaptation/CARE_CVCAHandbook.pdf

Hills, D. and Bennett, A., 2010. Framework for developing climate change adaptation

strategies and action plans for agriculture in Western Australia. Department of Agri-

culture and Food, Government of Western Australia.

ICEM (2011). Presentation: Basin-wide Climate Change Impact and Vulnerability As-

sessment for Wetlands of the LMB for Adaptation Planning. 2nd Regional Expert Advi-

sory Workshop, Vientiane, 11-12 July 2011.

ICEM (2015) Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Planning For Building Resilient

Mekong Towns ADB and the Nordic Development Fund, Hanoi. ISBN 978-0-9924435-5-

9.

IPCC (2007): Summary for Policymakers. In: Climate Change 2007: Impacts, Adapta-

tion and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Re-

port of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, M.L. Parry, O.F. Canziani,

29

J.P. Palutikof, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson, Eds., Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge, UK, 7-22.

Marshall, N. Marshall, P. Tamelander, J. Obura, D. Malleret-King, D. Cinner, J.(2009). A

Framework for Social Adaptation to Climate Change: Sustaining Tropical Coastal

Communities and Industries. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Meynell,P.J., Thongsavath, O., Xeuasing, K., Vannalath, V., and Glémet, R.

(2014).Climate Vulnerability Assessment of BeungKiatNgongRamsar site, Lao PDR

Vientiane, Lao PDR: IUCN.127pp. (IUCN 2014)

Morgan, C. L. (2011). “Vulnerability Assessment: A Review of Approaches”.IUCN,

Gland, Switzerland.

Preston, B.L. and Stafford-Smith, M., ( 2009) Framing vulnerability and adaptive ca-

pacity assessment: Discussion paper. CSIRO Climate Adaptation Flagship Working

paper No. 2.

http://www.csiro.au/org/ClimateAdaptationFlagship.html

PROVIA (2013).“PROVIA Guidance on Assessing Vulnerability, Impacts and Adapta-

tion to Climate Change”.Consultation document, United Nations Environment Pro-

gramme, Nairobi, Kenya, Pp.198. Available at:

www.unep.org/provia/.../PROVIA_guidance_report_low_resolution.pdf

Rizvi, Ali Raza, Kirstin van Riel, & Emily Zakowski (2014) “Inventory of tools and meth-

odologies for the assessment of Climate change Vulnerability and Adaptation”. IUCN

EbA Knowledge Series – Working Paper

Roth, A. and Rist, S. (2012). “Promoting Local Innovations (PLI) for Community-Based

Climate Change Adaptation in Coastal Areas, A Facilitator’s Guide to the PLI Work-

shop”. Gland, Switzerland: IUCN.

Schipper L., Liu W., Krawanchid D., and Chanthy S. (2010) Review of Climate Change

Adaptation Methods and Tools. MRC Technical Paper No. 34, Mekong River Commis-

sion, Vientiane

Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (2009) Connecting Biodiversity

and Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation: Report of the Second Ad Hoc

Technical Expert Group on Biodiversity and Climate Change, Montreal, Technical Se-

ries No. 41, 126 pp.

Shott, J. and Mather, R. (2012). “Climate Resilience Evaluation for Adaptation

Through Empowerment (CREATE): Adaptation made easy for everyone”. IUCN,

Bangkok, Thailand. Available at:

https://cmsdata.iucn.org/downloads/create_factsheet_final.pdf

UKCIP (Climate Impacts Programme). (2007). Identifying Adaptation Options. Availa-

ble at:

http://www.ukcip.org.uk/wordpress/wp-content/PDFs/ID_Adapt_options.pdf

30

UNFCCC (2008).“Compendium on methods and tools to evaluate impacts of, and

vulnerability and adaptation to climate change”. UNFCCC Secretariat with the ser-

vices of: Erica Pinto, Robert C. Kay and Ailbhe Travers, CZM pty. Ltd Stratus Consulting

Inc.

USAID Mekong ARCC Climate Change Impact and Adaptation Study (2013)

WWF (2014) Draft Report Climate Change Vulnerability and Adaptation Assessment:

The ‘Central Section’ - Mekong River, North-East Cambodia.